Race reaction

After reading Scott Burkhart’s letter to the editor (“Civil discourse,” May 30), I had to respond. Mr. Burkhart makes reference to race and race-baiting in his letter and makes the statement, “Would you reduce your argument to name-calling rather than trying to convince those listening that your ideas are superior through proper intellectual discourse?”

I’m sure Mr. Burkhart believes what he is saying, but many apparently must not agree with him. If you speak ill of President Obama, with no reference to his race or color, a great deal of those who are ardent supporters of his (incredulously, still) will rush to call you a racist. This seems to have been the greatest gift to some who support Obama in that they will whip out the word “racist” in many instances when someone denounces the policies of President Obama.

Civil discourse? Sure, the left calls for it, all right — now. Five or six years ago? Not so much, and this seems to be more “do as we say, not as we do” liberal behavior.

It's called the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. When it is a letter that only you agree with, it is called the Soviet Politburo. You see, in the United States we believe that people can have differing points of view and these same people are allowed to express those views in public forums. I might point out that when you see Mr. Shewman's posts in the future, you have the right not to read them. See how this "rights" thing works?

The First Amendment applies to government action, not private action, so it is irrelevant to whether a letter to the editor should be posted (or whether a post can be removed). Clearly, like most conservatives, you don't understand how this "rights" thing works.

I was pointing out that the author of the letter has a right to express himself. The LJW has a right to publish his letter. Both of these rights are protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, are they not?

Gee, I don't know, let me think about that one. I wish I could ask Rosa Parks of Selma, Alabama that question. I wonder what she would say about society's rules. (I hit that one out of the park, didn't I?)

There is a difference in suggesting that someone "shut the heck up" than expecting someone to shut them up. My preference was that they remain silent. I did not call out the newspaper for allowing them to express themselves. See the difference?

If the arguments against Obama were rational, we liberals might respect them as mere differences of opinion. But ridiculous assertions, such as Obama was born in Kenya or is a Muslim, in spite of overwhelming contradictory evidence, are so irrational that they clearly stem from blind hatred, and race seems the most likely basis for that hatred.

"If arguments against Obama were rational" - Frequently, arguments are made that are irrational. Like a poster just above, a "SnakeFist" who states that most conservatives don't understand how "rights" work.

Oh but to us the arguments are more than "rational." However the Uber-Liberals have no use for logic or common sense. To criticize him or his policies is to identify yourself as "racist" be that true or not.

SnakeFist makes excellent points. I have heard many conservatives decry the birther and racist remarks. unhappily what we are reading on this forum are people totally ignoring valid points and droning on as if those points were not valid.

someone must've earned good behavior to get out of siberia and do the usual
do se do dance around what his ilk are the best at doing.....talking crazy
and assailing those who call them out for it....classic hannity or o reilly
shtick....other than that what do they have goign for them? nothing....

The new first line of defense against racism is to claim that it is used "all the time," even when nothing racist has been said. In fact, that is rarely the case and often times the person making such a claim is the first person to even mention race in an argument. Yes, it has happened, but even though such a charge is rare it is a shame when it does. However, I have no doubt that some would prefer that racism just be ignored altogether, including this letter writer who is also a banned LJWorld on-line contributor. I only wish some of his remarks were still available on race. To think, this is the person who now sees himself as the Anointed One when it comes to speaking about racism is too funny.

Out of 8 millions votes in 2008-only 30 alleged cases of voter fraud nationally.Notice how rockchalk1977 lists all the states that voter suppression is happening."So the Democrats can cheat in November"....really?If it aint close, they can't cheat and there will be no need for another Supreme Court appointed President.

Did you know that not a single person complained about intimidation at the polling place you speak of? Not one. Your fear of this so-called new Black Panther group is hysterical. They have what, around five members? Too funny.

I say the attention given to what is truly a handful of people is far overblown among FoxNews viewers, especially when compared to the many members of skinhead and White supremacy organizations in this country. FoxNews has continued to go on and on with this isolated incident by a couple of people in one voting place (where not ONE person actually complained) because it sparks fear among their viewers, which is their bread and butter.

By the way, if this were just about voter intimidation that upsets you, I sure don't recall you, rockchalk, or Tom in any of his past lives here, discussing the issue of Minutemen attempting to intimidate hispanic voters at polling places in Arizona in 2006. Do recall this happening?

Of course, you don't see me going on about it either, because it is an isolated case of a couple of people. I certainly don't think it represents the vast, vast majority of Republican voters. I don't believe the Minutemen (one of which recently went on a killing rampage in AZ) are more than a few foolish individuals. They don't warrant the attention. Neither do the couple of people who call themselves the NBP. That is the point.

But if you watch FoxNews like it is a religion, you won't possibly understand.

Wow. Another Black man found he had no evidence on which to charge anyone, so it must be a conspiracy between Eric Holder and Obama to let all those pesky Black folks run amuck right? This tells me more about the Author of this and his usual compadres than they realize.

I read in another blog post where ideology may cause people to forego logic in their arguments. Calling opponents of Mr. Obama racist is a very predictable thing, especially when his record is so short on actual achievement. You really leave his supporters with only 2 choices; agree that he has performed rather poorly during his term in office, or attack with accusations of racism simply because they have no other club left in the bag. Calling people who pose sound arguments against Mr. Obama racist is as good as admitting we have a president who is not doing a very good job.

But, we see a lot of name calling and derogatory remarks, little "funny" names, etc. and not much substantive criticism.

As far as your choices, the other one is that he inherited a mess, has done some things to get us going in the right direction, and has faced clear opposition from the R legislators intended to defeat him.

And, he's better than the R candidates, which is the only judgement call I have to make to decide for whom to vote.

Nobody's calling people who make sound arguments against his policies racist - in fact, those on the left often criticize him - he's not ideal, by any means.

tbaker, I agree that it happens, but it is the exception, not the rule. It is rare when it happens, and when it does it should be dismissed outright, just as birthers and people who call Obama a Muslim should be dismissed.

let's see....the Sapulpa Daily Herald refused to print Barack Obama's victory
in their newspaper in November 2008. Sapulpa is fifteen minutes southwest
of Tulsa and is on Route 66 and is on allotted Creek and Yuchi lands with
many Creek and Yuchi tribal members in the area. I go through there to OKC
for Thunder games. Don't admit publically that you don't like someone due to
their skin tone....make up excuses hide behind the first amendment and
attack those who see through the transparent actions of spineless people
bent on a whisper campaign whether it's kenya, ayers, cherokee ancestry,
or some other distracting rightwing nonsense that was originated by the
late lee atwater to help a cia operative become president in 1988. When
there is no real platform except deceive the dummies with religion,
abortion, illegals, and guns, who cares if they elect dummies to
cripple a central govenment and then blame the central government
without mentioning the state's rights dummies hijacking and filibustering
all possible solutions to bring that original failure....trickle down or voodoo
economics as father bush called it in 1980. Nice to know we know your
modus operandi....

there is no bigotry in telling the truth....just sore losers who left educated, repsonsible,
and respectible republicans behind when the kool aid was handed around in the
early 1990's as every middle aged crank around me in Topeka at the time became
a dittohead. talk to the fifty or so former kansas gop legislators who think
brownback's tax plan will kill kansas. someone's own people thinks they're
being hijacked by the riders on the crazy train. also you hate on me because
you ain't me. time to go to work....leave the people on the basement time
to chime in as a parent brings them down food to their room.

also....I get your comments removed because you actually say offensive things.
getting me removed is like telling the teacher. no one likes tattle tales.
also....learn to spell bigot both ways if you use it.....

Interesting take. I personally don't see many people calling others racist on this thread. Many, like myself, acknowledge that racism is part of American society and recognize that there are indeed racists out there, but not so much of people here actually calling others "racist." I suspect it is far less than half of us who would actually fit the term. A few would, but there aren't that many.